Get updates from Friendly Atheist delivered straight to your inbox
(via Progressive Secular Humanist Examiner)
Game. Set. Match. :))))))
JP Temple Morgan spokesperson says, “It was just. He upset banks.”
Roman Army reports: “He was a rabble rouser, and opposed our occupation of Judea. clearly a traitor to the Empire.”
Prostitutes Guild of the Greater East Med Region: “He was a pretty cool guy. He washed our feet and said nice things. He didn’t really understand that we need actual money, but he was still a nice person.”
Peter: “Who? Dude, that’s some Ancient News Network BS. I was never there. No, really.”
“Coming up next, how Jews are destroying the Roman Empire.”
Man, the writers of Family Guy would probably have this as a gag and it would be just as cringe worthy.
Socialist? I don’t think so. Try again.
I have always said that in another time and place and story, American Christians would be competing to shriek “Crucify him!” the loudest.
I have to agree, Fox would call him a communist not a socialist (afterall his followers had Anamias and Sapphira killed for not handing over all their property).
They died because they lied (not that that makes their deaths any more justifiable).The followers specifically said the couple could have done whatever they wanted with their property.
Not just Americans.
And not just Christians.
Ok, communist? It’s sort of anachronistic to go there though. I don’t see any bible support for capitalism or anyother economic system.
“I was just standing my ground.” — Pilate
Not quite. In Acts 5 the original lie to the Holy Spirit was keeping back some of the profits from the sale of the land from the apostles.
“Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
Peter never said they would have been okay if they kept the money for themselves, only that they were free to do with the money what they wished, and then they suffered the consequences of their actions.
The followers specifically said the couple could have done whatever they wanted with their property.
That was mighty white of them.
Isn’t it interesting that back then, as today, it was all about the money. The God works in mysterious ways, but it is baffling why he can’t magically poof money into existence for his cause, but he can instantly kill someone for not turning all of theirs over. God seems more like a human.
In my opinion, Christian leaders don’t want Christ to return because they would become redundant. Likewise, merchants of Christian bling would then have worthless inventory (how much would you pay for a natural Christmas tree on Boxing Day).
America (and most modern westernized countries) is rightfully proud to have shed the church supported Devine Right of Kings form of government in favour of democracy. Why do American Christians yearn to give power back to an unelected celestial overlord?
You’re stretching a bit to suggest that the talking heads at Fox understand the difference between socialism & communism.
Oh, those poor, persecuted Romans! They can’t even crucify someone without being criticized.
In other news the Roman government is considering giving tax exemptions to Judas Iscariot and his family for generations to come. Some UnRoman people dislike this, we’ll come back with a debate about how evil they are at 5.
There are still ‘sidewalk’ preachers today, only now we just try to avoid eye contact and keep walking.
Jesus did not support any political system. He supports whatever system comes the closest to bringing about love, true justice and peace for a particular culture in a particular time. He doesn’t care what title you give it. Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to a political title? Try again.
You referenced a site discussing a movement that started in the 1960’s. How does that reflect on Jesus’ teachings?
Do you only ever read the front page? Seriously, you have to keep reading. Then you would realize, at the very least, that the movement didn’t start in the 1960s (that line talked about how the movement became popular in the UK in the 1960s).
For FSM’s sake, read even the very next line.
Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to a political title?
That’s a bit like asking, [ahem]:
“Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to particular views on what humans do with each others’ genitals?”
“Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to blessing a handful of tribes in the backwater middle of nowhere as His chosen people?”
“Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to a particular gender to be referred to by?”
“Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to appearing only in Judaea and speaking only one language when He wants to deliver what is supposedly the most important message He has ever delivered to humanity?”
Or, for that matter,
“Do you really think that the God of the universe would tie himself down to humanity, at all?”
It’s a big universe. The God described in the Bible is quite small and parochial and quaint by comparison.
i am a practicing roman catholic 100% committed to Roman Catholic teachings, and I too, hate when people confuse american conservatism with christianity.
If what we do with our genitals effects our spiritual health then yes.
If it is what leads to the current state of the world on which the vast majority of the population worships him (if you count Christians, Jews and Muslims) then yes.
He doesn’t tie himself down to a gender. We simply refer to him that way.
See my answer to your second question.
He has not tied himself down to humanity but has brought himself down to us so that we may know him more intimately. I suppose though that he could do the same for any alien races of creatures that may be out there.
You are building a box for God that he does not describe in the Bible. You seem to be making assumptions that should not exist.
You are building a box for God…
Physician, heal thyself.